The Zimmerman/Martin incident was a really poor case for the NAACP to hang its hat on. Especially when you look into Zimmerman’s background, family, volunteer work, etc. it’s really hard to point at him and yell “racist!”

The media and Sharptons of the world jumped too quickly on this and got in over their collective head. Now they’re scrambling to keep the narrative as fact-free as possible because literally none of the facts support their contention that this was “profiling” that led to “stand your ground” that led to “murder.”

In the end, the result is going to be further racial tension and, worse, more dead young black men. Because if you look around the internet you’ll see that a lot of folks are reading this acquittal as some kind of permission slip: “if a black kid hits me, I can shoot him!” They’re taking the narrative from the NAACP plus the acquittal (based on actual facts) and merging them into NAACP’s facts = acquittal. The NAACP just told the American people that if a “white” guy purposely profiles, hunts down, and confronts an innocent young black teen, picks a fight with him, then shoots him to death the law says it’s ok. Is that really the message they want going out to the tens of thousands of idiots on Stormfront?

More importantly, is it the message they want going out to the general populace, pushing the pendulum a little farther toward “justified” when it comes to cases like this? The national psyche has been reprogrammed a bit and probably not for the better. I don’t think anyone would disagree that the “facts” as presented by NAACP spell out a pretty clear case of manslaughter. If things had happened the way the NAACP wants us to believe, then yes, Zimmerman should have gone to prison. But he didn’t go to prison. So they’ve accomplished nothing more than lowering the bar for the next claim of self-defense when a white guy shoots a black guy. Is that success in the NAACP’s eyes? I sincerely doubt it.

I talked to a good friend who’s a lawyer at the NRA a while back about how they pick which 2A-related cases to support. They’re smart. They don’t jump on the first case they see. Bad cases make bad law. So when something is going to reach national scope they look for the case that starts them with the biggest possible advantage. They look for a case where the outcome is obvious… not one in which all the legal pundits predict failure and a unanimous jury then delivers it.

The NAACP and Sharpton and President Obama should have done the same here. Does inappropriate racial profiling happen? Of course it does. You’re an idiot if you don’t believe that. Does it sometimes lead to unjustifiable use of force (even deadly force) against African American teens? Of course it does. So go find one of those cases to champion your cause, and many of us will be right there behind you. This case wasn’t it.

Train hard & stay safe! ToddG

10 Responses to “Does the NAACP Want More Dead Teens?”

Ahh, the voice of reason, can it be heard in a internet filled with keyboard lawyers and part time ninja/commandos?

I really think you are looking at things the wrong way here. It’s not so much that armed citizens are buying into the NAACP’s argument or thinks it’s OK to profile black kids. That’s not happening and that’s not what will get more young black men killed.

What will get more young black men killed is the Community-Organizer-In-Chief’s and The Attorney General’s narrative. If enough young black men see that as their green light to go out and attack people sooner or later they will single out the wrong victim and become victims themselves.

David — Zimmerman was hardly anti-NAACP material, either. That’s my point. The NAACP and similar groups have turned this into some kind of “white vs black” thing when that doesn’t even fit the facts of the case.

Reno — I understand what you’re saying but I really do think you’re underestimating the message this event has sent to the general populace. Most people have only heard the media/NAACP version of events — a version which is almost devoid of true facts — and they see an acquittal. What does that tell them? That if things happen the way the NAACP says they did here, and someone shoots a black teenager as a result, IT’S OK.

($0.02) The only racists in this whole mess are those who are so set against white men they are willing to overlook the fact that Zimmerman is as white as their President. I don’t care if Zimmerman was a Black Hillbilly Rabbi Lesbian Transgender Dwarf who illegally crossed the Mexican border to look FABULOUS in a gay pride parade, he had every right to defend himself against what happened to him.

I think following Martin was not a bright idea but it is not illegal to follow someone. Martin would have also been within his rights to ask why he was being followed, but once you lay a hand on someone you don’t know you are opening yourself up for a response you may not like. I don’t like the “sheepdog” mindset it seems a small number of CCW/CCH holders feel they have been sworn into once they get a permit. Both of them did stupid things that night and there was no winner, it was a sad totally avoidable situation. (/$0.02)

My guess is that the sharptons and jacksons of the political world jumped on this case because there haven’t been any cases in a looooong time of a white person racially profiling a black person which resulted in that black person’s murder. I’m not so naive as to believe that won’t happen again in the near future but the facts are in and there are exponential more violent crimes of black on whites due to race. Just check the FBI crime stats or track violent crimes in your nearest metropolitan area.

Todd: I can see only one fault with your post. It appears to assume that the Sharptons of the world would prefer to operate in good faith. My assumption–which I think is pretty much supported by history–is that to those guys “good faith” is an abstraction while the chance to say something to a TV camera is both very real and very profitable, and the more incendiary the comments, the more TV time they get.

I somewhat agree with Charles Barkley when he said that when it comes to the issue of race relations few have pure hearts. Still, there are those amongst the human race, sinners of course, who are willing to admit past mistakes and strive to look at a man’s character and not the color of his skin. The problem, if course is that the individuals and organizations fanning these flames seem to have another agenda. Some did not agree with the 1992 decision by the DOJ to prosecute two of the LA police officers involved in the Rodney King incident for civil rights violations; but the DOJ back then was much more competent in that pursuit than they are showing to be now.